Disposed¶29

M/S Navkaar Associates v. Union of India

Chhattisgarh HC22 Jul 2026MCC/541/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Condonation of delay; 234 days; restoration of writ petition; WPT No. 180 of 2023; dismissal in default; peremptory order; default not made good; order dated 22.08.2023; cost Rs. 5,000/-; Library Fund High Court Bar Association Bilaspur; MCC No. 541 of 2024; I.A. No. 01/2024; M/s Navkaar Associates; Navin Nagwani; Central GST and Central Excise Raipur; SVLDR Scheme 2019; GST Council; CBIC; indirect tax; Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey; decided 23.07.2026; Manaynath Thakur; Maneesh Sharma.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 234 days in filing MCC No. 541 of 2024 condoned; WPT No. 180 of 2023 restored to its original number subject to payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/- to Library Fund, High Court Bar Association, Bilaspur; MCC disposed of. ¶29

M/S Navkaar Associates Vs Union of India — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

CGHC010195182024

2026:CGHC:31422

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

MCC No. 541 of 2024

¶7

SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2026.07.23 14:29:24 +0530

¶8

M/s Navkaar Associates Through Its Partner Shri Navin Nagwani, Age 43 Years, S/o Mata Laxmi Nursing Home, Anupam Nagar, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

... Applicant

¶10

versus

¶11

Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue, Govt. Of India, New Delhi, India.

¶12

The Principal Commissioner Central GST And Central Excise, Having Office At GST Bhawan, Tikrapara, Raipur (C.G.)

¶13

The Additional Commissioner Central GST And Central Excise, Having Office Of GST Bhawan, Tikrapara, Raipur (C.G.)

¶14

Designated Committee Constituted Under SVLDR Scheme, 2019 Through The Principal Commissioner, Central GST And Central Excise Having Office At GST Bhawan, Tikrapara, Raipur (C.G.)

¶15

GST Council Through Its Chairman, New Delhi, India

¶16

Central Board Of Indirect Taxes Having Office At New Delhi.

¶17

... Respondent(s)

¶18

For Applicant : Mr. Manaynath Thakur, Advocate For Non-Applicants : Mr. Maneesh Sharma, Advocate

¶19

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶20

23.07.2026

¶21

Heard on I.A. No. 01/2024, an application for condonation of delay.

¶22

Having considered the reasons assigned in the application, I.A. No. 01/2024 is allowed and delay of 234 days caused in filing MCC is hereby condoned.

¶23

The present MCC has been moved for restoration of WPT No. 180 of 2023.

¶24

¶25

Learned counsel for applicant would submit that in WPT No. 180 of 2025, three weeks’ time was granted to make default good vide order dated 22.08.2023 and on account of peremptory order, the said petition was dismissed. He would submit that due to inadvertence, applicant could not rectify the default. He would submit that applicant is highly interested to pursue the original matter and he is ready to remove the default. He would pray to restore the petition to its original number.

¶26

On the other hand, Mr. Maneesh Sharma would oppose.

¶27

Heard.

¶28

Having considered submissions made by Mr. Thakur and reasons assigned in the application, same is allowed. The WPT No. 180 of 2023 is restored to its original number subject to payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/- payable to Library Fund, High Court Bar Association, Bilaspur.

¶29

Accordingly, the instant MCC is hereby disposed of.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE

¶32

$iddhant

M/S Navkaar Associates v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Navkaar Associates v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Satya Prakash Choudhary Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Khelan Bhaskar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rakesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Bharti Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Hemant Kumar Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

K.p.dewangan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh